Dr. Bonham's Case

Definition

Dr. Bonham's Case is a landmark legal decision from 1610 in England that established the principle of judicial review, allowing courts to overrule acts of Parliament that were found to be against common law or unjust. This case set a significant precedent for the relationship between legislative power and judicial authority, emphasizing the role of the judiciary in interpreting laws in a way that aligns with fundamental principles of justice.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Dr. Bonham's Case involved a dispute between Dr. Bonham, a physician, and the College of Physicians, where the court ruled that an act of Parliament could be invalid if it was against common right and reason.
2. The case was significant because it introduced the idea that the judiciary could check legislative power by declaring laws void if they were deemed unjust.
3. Sir Edward Coke, who presided over the case, famously stated that 'an act against common right and reason is void' which laid down an important principle for judicial review.
4. Dr. Bonham's Case has been cited in numerous legal arguments and decisions as a foundational case for the assertion of judicial authority over parliamentary acts.
5. While this case is not binding law today, its implications continue to influence discussions on the balance of power between different branches of government.

Review Questions

• How did Dr. Bonham's Case influence the development of judicial review in the context of common law?
  • Dr. Bonham's Case played a pivotal role in shaping the concept of judicial review by establishing that courts could invalidate legislative acts that contradicted common law or basic principles of justice. This decision marked an important evolution in English law, reinforcing the judiciary's power to ensure that legislation aligns with fundamental rights and reason. It laid the groundwork for future cases where courts would assert their authority to review and potentially overturn parliamentary decisions.
• Discuss the implications of Dr. Bonham's Case on the relationship between parliamentary sovereignty and judicial authority.
  • Dr. Bonham's Case highlighted a tension between parliamentary sovereignty and judicial authority by suggesting that even acts of Parliament could be subject to judicial scrutiny if they were found to be unjust or unreasonable. While Parliament holds ultimate legislative power, this case introduced a critical counterbalance whereby courts can intervene to protect common law principles. The resulting dynamic has led to ongoing debates about the limits of legislative power and the role of courts in upholding justice.
• Evaluate how Dr. Bonham's Case continues to impact modern interpretations of judicial review within constitutional law.
  • Dr. Bonham's Case remains a cornerstone for modern interpretations of judicial review, influencing how courts assess legislation against constitutional principles. Its legacy informs contemporary debates about the judiciary's role in democracy, particularly regarding checks and balances between branches of government. By asserting that legislation must conform to reason and justice, this case has paved the way for courts to actively engage in constitutional interpretation, thereby shaping the legal landscape we see today.

Related terms

Judicial Review: The power of courts to assess whether a law is in compliance with the constitution or common law, and to invalidate laws that are found to be unconstitutional.

Common Law: A body of unwritten laws based on legal precedents established by the courts, serving as a key foundation for the legal system in England and many other countries.

Parliamentary Sovereignty: The principle that Parliament has the ultimate legal authority and can create or end any law, which is a fundamental concept in the UK constitution.